Dearest Keyboard Warrior, Fashionista and …/.. ,

It is with great empathy that I address you for your affectionate concerns for Anna and friends are a reflection of your self-pity and indulgence of this ever individualistic world.

Since the sensitivity of this argument is on Education, let me present the crux of its desired outcome. Greeks invented this with the sole purpose to elevate us into contributing, responsible and reciprocating members of the society. One of which, relevant to this induced discussion is the fact that the appreciation of anthropology is a keynote to education.

Use of vulgarities, in that sense is not wrong, however still deem inappropriate by the fact that we are a globalised world and facet with multiple imperialism. In the light of what Anna has said, it is a layman expression of a Singaporean Chinese. I agree that many local heartlanders would scull at the occurrence of such words, but they accept it, by and large as a culture which edifies the closet nature of the Chinese culture, even in a bustling metropolitan state.

Secondly, I shall address the issue of this argument, and apparently it is something substituted with the word: Diplomacy.

In the spirit of being educated individuals, I shall favourable list down as I observed.

This chat started with alias “…” and the former had an impending question which seems to be targeted ad Anna and (correct me if I’m wrong), her relationship.

In her very nature, Anna rebuked alias “…”, for she felt it was uncalled for, maintaining your autonomy.

There is this huge uproar on the emotionally-fuelled responses, whether legitimately or illegitimately regarded as a diplomatic solution.

Finally, there is a peculiar prejudice for the inability of proper English Expression.

Being anonymous usually means that the former has something to hide. Since we are talking about diplomacy here, a full disclosure would only suffice, since your display of displeasure was not only an intrusion, it is simply also known as cyber-bullying. Since we assume that we are all matured individuals, we shall take it as a passionate discussion.

Autonomy is practiced with the virtue that a compromise is made. Since the protagonist here (I take it as Anna for this case) does not agree to it, then they secondary arguments are to be deemed void. Furthermore, since this allotted area in what we regarded as a phenomenon, the contributor of this web blog has the discretion to have sovereignty as to what appears here.

Finally, it is embarrassing that you flaunt your language capacity here, as a cheap thrill to null people who has gifting in other fields. Conventional wisdom would say “pick on someone your own size,” but I would say that your misconception that presenting yourself to sound astute speaks volumes of how pathetic and ego-centric you are that you see value in things that moth and rust will destroy. I believe you are more than capable to describe your displeasure directly, and not blatantly distract the emphasis on the argument and make them look bad already. It is disappointing that you resort to juvenile measures to win the case, and malign the true frustration.

If you are displease with Anna, by all means express yourself, and as educated people, express yourself appropriately. Cultural considerations are second nature to educated people, even in the case of peers and social groups. Do not use complementing arguments which in this case is an act of prejudice at its worst for a Singaporean and the denial that you refuse the occurrence of vulgarities, which I assume (since you have tons of assumptions) that you are so familiar, you use it yourself. Reserve English for appropriate venues, oh isn’t that something education teaches you too?

I got to hand it to you, which you attempt to distort the fallacy of your argument with gestures of neutrality and compliments. Frankly speaking it does not hide the fact that you are infuriated, and it is clearly not expressed.

You are right to say that further arguments with them will not resolve anything, because it’s not about your abrupt and undefined intentions here, that is only the cover. Let’s talk about what you are unhappy about.

For all you know, you three aliases “…”, “keyboard Warrior” and “Fashionista” happen to be the same person who expresses the inability to gauge her capacity in which they so aptly describes. That is the homicidal rebut that you have to expect presenting your autonomy here.

To set the record straight, I am undoubtedly pro-Anna, for you have vindicated my actions in your previous comments. I am taking a stand, why try to act magnanimous by assuming you know both sides of the story? Why do you think you have the authority to judge someone with your impeccable sense of misguided facism? I am only persuading you to drop your pretence and disregard your facet and admit that you are exactly just like us, a typical adolescent Singaporean.

Since we took the liberty to meet your somewhat-despicable requirements, I only asked for your sanction from this site prior to your explanation to your displeasure. I apologise that I resort to such inbred notions, for I was requested to do so. Bombastic words are not my cup of tea apparently.

From her dear friend,

Jerome

P.S. Ability to express yourself eloquently does not necessarily reflect on your capacity. Take that.